(1) SPECIAL leave granted. (2) HEARD counsel on both sides. (3) THE High Court has interfered with the order of the Rent Controller on grounds which do not appear to be germane. The Rent Controller, after examining all the contentions raised by the 1st respondent, declined to grant to the 1st respondent leave to defend in the present proceeding, which is filed under Section 14-D of the Delhi Rent Control Act. Under the said section, a widow is given the right to recover immediate possession of the premises on the ground that she requires the premises for her own residence. (4) THE High Court in revision has accepted the bare allegation made by the 1st respondent tenant to the effect that the appellant desires to construct a multi-storeyed structure on that property, although the entire case of the appellant is that she requires the premises for her own residence. The High Court has further relied on the fact that two tenants occupying one room each, were earlier evicted under Section 14(1)(e). We fail to see how the eviction of two tenants occupying one room each under Section 14(1)(e) would affect the claim of the appellant under Section 14-D to obtain possession of the premises for her own residence when she has four sons staying with her. The impugned order of the High Court is therefore, set aside. The 1st respondent is granted time up to 30-4-1999 to vacate the premises on his filing the usual undertaking in this Court within one week from today. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.